I'm
going to preface this post by stating that there will be many blunt
statements put forth in the following paragraphs, probably many of
them less than politically correct. However, that's how I found my
assigned article to be, so that's how I will be writing.
The
article that I read this week discussed stereotypes that are present
in American culture, how they make themselves known to society, and
the amount of truth that there is to each of them. I found the
article both interesting and informative, and also somewhat
surprising. I've always known that there are stereotypes out there,
most of them shallow and none too pleasant. However, what I didn't
know was the grain of truth that lies within most of them.
The
article presented these ideas as facts, so that's how I'll speak of
them. The facts expressed are mostly along the lines of a correlation
between status and ethnicity/religion/race. Immigrants in general are
always notoriously either very well off, or some of the poorest in
the nation, depending on where in the world they are from. For
instance, Africans tend to be placed in the “poor and uneducated”
category, while Asians are often put in the “rich and intelligent”
one. Nobody that I know of has ever claimed to back those
stereotypes with facts, but that's exactly what this article is
doing.
I
don't really know how I feel about that. After all, it has been my
life long goal to not judge people at all, let alone by any physical
characteristic. Then again, the facts sometimes line up to disprove
prejudices, like in the case of the Nigerians at Harvard. In that
case, I have to side with the facts. And, as I don't like to be blind
or one-sided, I must therefore also accept that the facts often line
up in favour of stereotypes.
Despite the fact that I
accept the grain of truth in many stereotypes as proven to me in the
article, I'm still sure that I won't let this revelation colour my
judgement in the future.
The article in question can be found here.
The "truth" behind the judgment is what needs to be questioned. The "truth" behind the kernal of truth also needs to be questioned. What ongoing or historical external forces or circumstances may have converged to shape the "truth," or even keep it going?" Your writing piques interest and makes me, and likely others curious. Perhaps a small blurb about the substance of the article (or other things you write about) would be helpful for those of us who want to dialogue more with you here.
ReplyDelete(I'm accepting the barb against my lack of response as I see it, and with good grace. Yet again I apologise for the delay.)
DeleteProof is offered in the form of statistics, which I believe came from trustworthy sources. I will admit, however, that I may have been hasty as accepting them as fact - I don't recall whether I looked into it further or not.
Sorry I can't give you a better response... and again, sorry it took me so long to reply.
e.g. the controversial part might be the "facts" the article offers to support the stereotypes.
ReplyDelete